Interesting that they say they're going with dual-clutch robotized manuals when some supercar manufacturers are looking back to single-clutch robotized manuals due to the massive weight of the double-clutch system (Aston-Martin and Lamborghini specifically).

Massive weight? If the cars were under 2000lb, the weight difference would matter. But I bet it's less than many owners difference to their ideal weight anyway.

it would be interesting to drive one of the single clutch systems- see how fast they actually can shift. The one time I did was terrible, but that was almost 20 years ago. And the first AML system with the dual clutch was pretty nice.

alfadriver wrote:
Massive weight? If the cars were under 2000lb, the weight difference would matter. But I bet it's less than many owners difference to their ideal weight anyway.

The weight is significant, it could be as much as 100lbs on a gearbox meant to take near-four-digit power, and these are very performance-focused cars, so it could be a factor. Aston-Martin ruled out a dual-clutch on the AM-RB001 due to the weight and bulk.

alfadriver wrote:
it would be interesting to drive one of the single clutch systems- see how fast they actually can shift. The one time I did was terrible, but that was almost 20 years ago. And the first AML system with the dual clutch was pretty nice.

Some modern robotized single-clutch gearboxes I can think of are in the MP4-12C and Aventador.

I guess I'm not seeing why the double clutch ones weigh that much more. It's a second clutch, a second input shaft and a few bearings -- that's adding 50% more weight to the transmission? Why?

I wonder if they've improved the on-street behaviour of the single-clutch robo-trannies? The reason everyone went to double clutch is that the single clutch ones are really herky-jerky at parking lot speeds.

California was the last with a manual and they sold 4 total. They are not loosing any business. Ferrari sells numbers now, 0-60 and the manual would just be an albatross on that front.

Also Lambo can take the single clutch and shove it, they just cannot get a dual clutch to work with the power that the Aventadoor puts out and they know it is not worth the effort for the time being. The Base and the SV Aventadoor shifts with such a kick it almost feels broken.

Considering the number of 488's winning races lagainst Audi R8's, Nissan GT-R, Mclaren, Mercedes SLR, Lamborghini, etc. I'd say theres more to it than just "look at me" and I suspect your jealousy is showing a bit there.

Several. It's true. Not that they aren't cool or anything... but they are not as exciting as a lot of people who haven't spent all their free time at a race track driving stuff think they are. It's like high end audio or road cycling equipment. 99% of the bang comes at 20% of the price of the market ceiling and the additional 80% over what a decent performance car costs is all just exclusivity, bullschit and marketing.

Park Maranello's finest next to a lowly SRF and I'm jumping in the Ford.

Huckleberry wrote:
In reply to Cotton:
Several. It's true. Not that they aren't cool or anything... but they are not as exciting as a lot of people who haven't spent all their free time at a race track driving stuff think they are. It's like high end audio or road cycling equipment. 99% of the bang comes at 20% of the price of the market ceiling and the additional 80% over what a decent performance car costs is all just exclusivity, bullschit and marketing.
Park Maranello's finest next to a lowly SRF and I'm jumping in the Ford.

I wasn't responding to you, I was responding to toyman's "overpriced, status symbol, blah blah post". My gated Modena is parked beside my 36hp 62 beetle, so I obviously don't have a problem with cheap and slow and don't buy anything to show off or whatever, but I consider myself a true car guy and like to enjoy from all across the spectrum.

Nope, and if you gave me one, I'd sell it instantly and go buy something just as fun to drive, for 10% of the money. Then I'd spend the rest on a 100 X 100 shop with every tool I don't already have.

Then again, I don't get the BMW love either. Or the love for a tarted up VW.

I get the ferrari thing entirely, clarkson put it pretty well when he said that just sitting in one in traffic is akin to having a pair of supermodels ever so gently run their fingers across the skin on your arms. (I'm paraphrasing badly). There's a specialness that ferrari builds that cant be easily duplicated, they just make you tingle in a way few other things in the world do. Cars aren't just about lap times or about acceleration, sometimes they're about a feeling, ferarri are better at inducing that feeling than anyone else. I'm with you on der germans though, feeling quality without being quality doesn't do e36m3 for me.

Huckleberry wrote:
In reply to Cotton:
Several. It's true. Not that they aren't cool or anything... but they are not as exciting as a lot of people who haven't spent all their free time at a race track driving stuff think they are. It's like high end audio or road cycling equipment. 99% of the bang comes at 20% of the price of the market ceiling and the additional 80% over what a decent performance car costs is all just exclusivity, bullschit and marketing.
Park Maranello's finest next to a lowly SRF and I'm jumping in the Ford.

I wasn't responding to you, I was responding to toyman's "overpriced, status symbol, blah blah post". My gated Modena is parked beside my 36hp 62 beetle, so I obviously don't have a problem with cheap and slow and don't buy anything to show off or whatever, but I consider myself a true car guy and like to enjoy from all across the spectrum.

A 360 Challenge could easily win a place in my heart. It was the last F car I really liked the look of and it was raw and unsophisticated, a little noisy, not really for grown-ups at all.

Toyman01 wrote:
In reply to Cotton:
In 15 years, I've never seen one at a track day, on track. They'll rev the engines in the paddock, but they won't take them on track.
I saw one at a autocross, the dude got pissed and stormed off, because he was slower than a $1000 RX7.
Locally, they are a cars and coffee car. Show up, stand around polishing it, put it back in the garage. That's not my thing.
I'm about driving. I don't really care what it is. Cheap and fun is all that counts for me.
This is my experiance with them, in the area I live. You may be different. Being on here, you probably are. You are a Car Guy. I realise my above statement came across as a personal jab. I apologise.

Having moved from SoCal to NJ, I get your perspective. Down in CA, I saw a ton of super cars thrashed in the canyons and street parked with the top down and windows open. There are maybe 10 days in the year not fit for driving due to weather, and speed limits also seem to be a lot more suggestive in those parts. Given the high concentration of supercars, they stand out, but they're not out of place. I imagine that a Ferrari in that area is one of the few places where driving just isn't an ordeal.